Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christianity's Criminal History


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   Keep. While I personally would favour a renaming of this article to the original German title, that is a separate discussion that can be had at the article talk page and has no impact on the keep or delete decision. Apart from that: there is no requirement in the GNG or anywhere else that sources have to be in English, certainly not for non-English subjects. Finally, I don't think that there was a good reason to relist this a second time, but it hasn't done any harm of course. Fram (talk) 15:21, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Christianity's Criminal History

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NBOOK Only one news source mentions it that I have found which is just a brief mention, only 1050 hits on a Google search shows this book kas so far had zero impact anywhere. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:44, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. As the article mentions, somebody wrote a whole book in response to this book series. And you'll find plenty sources once you search for the German title of this series: Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums. The article is not yet very good and could use some paring down. --Randykitty (talk) 15:58, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 22:41, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The author of the 10 volumes wrote a book on it. It's the same author in the reference getting credit for the whole series.  -- No  unique  names  05:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * No, the book in response was edited by Hans Reinhard Seeliger and consists of papers from other academics, not including the author of Kriminalisierung des Christentums, Karlheinz Deschner. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Deschner's Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums is probably the most important work of literature about Christianity in the previous and the current century! As the book series have not been translated to English, there is - of course - not much to be found under the English title, but the page http://www.deschner.info/index.htm?/de/werk/kg/pressestimmen.htm alone lists 11 articles in the main stream media or by well-known experts. Most of the sources are newspapers and before the Internet was common (e.g. the first is from 1988) - i.e. they're NOT online. I'll just translate one single of them for you (no time for more - but Der Spiegel is really a renowned magazine and this comparison with Voltaire, Heine et al. published there should alone be sufficient): Prof. Dr. theol. Horst Herrmann, Der Spiegel  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nlmarco (talk • contribs) 09:14, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete, not seeing GNG met. -- No  unique  names  05:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. As far as I know Deschner's collected information on this issue is unique and it should be known that this work exists.--Eusc (talk) 11:52, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Even though I have !voted "keep" myself, this keep vote is not policy based. Notability has nothing to do with being unique. --Randykitty (talk) 11:56, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply to comment: Your objection is correct. Being unique is not a criterium. I checked the GNG and think that "Significant coverage" is a criterium that is met by the book, at least through publications in German. Here are two examples: A recension: (literaturkritik.de/Religionskritik? Allerdings!). As already mentioned above, Horst Herrmann, from 1970 til 1975 professor of church law at the Catholic theological faculty of Münster University, who left the Catholic church in 1981, wrote about Deschner's book in 1989 in an article in Der Spiegel: DER SPIEGEL 1/1989: Einer singt falsch beim Halleluja. And there are more examples (Frankfurter Rundschau, 12 August 2008). For the notability of a book there are one or more of these 5 criteria required. I think criteria 1 and 3 are met by the book. Criterium 2 is indirectly met because in the past a lot of prizes have been awarded to Deschner for his work of which the "Criminal History" is the most important. However, the tenth and last volume has not been published yet and will be published this year (2013), so the whole book is not completed yet. Criterium 4 is most likely met because Deschner is one of the most prominent figures in the field of criticism of religion in Germany. Here is an on-line example from SWR educational television: tele-akademie.de. I hope these examples are now sufficient to accept my Keep-vote.--Eusc (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Absolutely and many thanks for finding those sources (that should be worked into the article). --Randykitty (talk) 17:42, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per failing GNG. Automatic Strikeout  ( T  •  C ) 01:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 00:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:GNG & WP:NBOOK. I'm just not seeing it as notable. - Cameron11598  (Converse) 00:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete It has not been shown to satisfy WP:N or WP:NBOOK.Edison (talk) 02:19, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - This seems to be a translation of some or most of the massive article on German WP. What did not get ported over are these two secondary sources, however:
 * Hans Reinhard Seeliger (Hrsg.): Kriminalisierung des Christentums? Karlheinz Deschners Kirchengeschichte auf dem Prüfstand. [Symposium der Katholischen Akademie Schwerte vom 1. - 3. Oktober 1992], Herder, Freiburg im Breisgau 1993 (2., durchgesehe und verbesserte Auflage 1994), ISBN 3-451-23222-7.
 * Clara und Paul Reinsdorf (Hrsg.): Drahtzieher Gottes. Die Kirchen auf dem Marsch ins 21. Jahrhundert. Alibri, Aschaffenburg 1995, ISBN 3-9804386-2-7 / IBDK, Berlin 1995, ISBN 3-922601-26-X (Studiensammlung zu Kriminalisierung des Christentums?).
 * If you think about it, chances are a 10 volume work is gonna clear the notability bar, and this does, in my opinion. Carrite (talk) 06:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * @Eusc: Thanks a lot! I incorporated most of your references together with short citations (including English translations) to give a picture of how important Deschner and especially his main work Christianity's Criminal History is. IMHO, people here argue solely for deletion, because (1) they are Christians and try to censor (as usual) or because (2) they don't understand German and thus ignore the repercussions, Deschner's works have caused in German media & society for more than two decades! Concerning the NBOOK-criteria:
 * 1. There are by now 3 (= multiple) published works referenced in the article (and there exist more!): 2 articles in well-known German magazines (Der Spiegel, Frankfurter Rundschau) and one book (comprising multiple articles by multiple authors). All of them definitely are more than just a trivial plot summary.
 * 2. Deschner not only won multiple prizes (German WP is more complete than the English article), but the Giordano Bruno Foundation even created a prize named after him! The Christianity's Criminal History is Deschner's main work and thus clearly contributed significantly to all this.
 * 3. As already quoted in the article (see for example the excerpt from the "Der Spiegel"), Deschner's Criminal History made a "significant contribution to a [...] political or religious movement", because the Enlightenment is one of the most important political and anti-religious movements of European history.
 * I cannot say anything about criterion 4., because I didn't do any research on this, yet. Deschner maybe fails criterion 5., but as the article Christianity's Criminal History clearly meets at least 3 criteria, which is more than just one (!), there's no need to check criterion 5, anyway and only one conclusion: => Keep! Nlmarco (talk) 04:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Deschner obviously did not contribute to the Enlightenment, which happened several centuries before he was born. And the prize demonstrates notability of Deschner, but not necessarily of these books. -- 202.124.73.31 (talk) 01:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per above Mrmoustache14 (talk) 20:48, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Plainly notable, verifiable, and suitable for an entry, even if you only consider the research in this thread.  --Lockley (talk) 16:54, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge to Karlheinz Deschner. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK, at least as far as English sources go. No English translation of Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums even exists. -- 202.124.73.31 (talk) 01:46, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment There is absolutely no requirement for English sources or for the existence of an English version of this work. Please base your !vote on policy... --Randykitty (talk) 10:20, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Let me put it this way: none of the references I can read contribute to notability. And the subject of this article (a book with the English title "Christianity's Criminal History") appear not to exist. -- 202.124.73.54 (talk) 02:25, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * One person's inability to read the sources is irrelevant to notability, and, if our article title is wrong, it can easily be changed to Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums, the actual title of this book series. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Clearly notable, not being in English may mean it is not readily accessible to an English audience, but the German coverage ensures notability. Paul foord (talk) 00:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 14:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * iffy Seems to have some German notability and next to no footprint in English. Perhaps it should be moved to its original German title. Mangoe (talk) 15:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.